The Truth About Unique Animations, Individuality, and the System SCI Never Built
A full breakdown of what SCI claims is “too hard,” and how other studios have already done far more with far bigger rosters
Steel City Interactive keeps pushing the idea that giving every boxer unique animations or building deep tendency and trait systems requires massive teams, major budgets, and industry-scale resources. They act as if individuality is some impossible mountain to climb. That excuse collapses the moment you compare Undisputed to what other sports studios have been doing for decades with far larger rosters and far more complex gameplay.
Basketball. Football. Baseball. Soccer. Every sport has proven that individuality is achievable, scalable, and foundational. Boxing, which has fewer athletes and fewer movement branches, should be the easiest sport for unique styles and personality systems.
The truth is simple.
Other studios do more because they prioritize individual identity.
SCI did not because they never intended to build a real simulation at its core.
How NBA 2K exposes SCI’s excuses about unique animations
How many athletes are in NBA 2K
Recent 2K titles include:
-
Over 450 active NBA players
-
Hundreds of legends
-
A full WNBA roster
-
Dozens of special era players
The total roster often reaches 700 plus variations. This is not a typo.
How many have signature moves or play like themselves
A massive percentage of 2K athletes have:
-
Signature jumpers
-
Signature dribble combos
-
Signature layup packages
-
Signature dunks
-
Signature pull-ups
-
Signature post fades
-
Signature celebrations
-
Signature free throws
-
Signature footwork
-
Signature defensive movements
-
Signature triple threat sets
-
Playcalling tendencies
-
Go to move tendencies
-
Decision logic that reflects real-world habits
2K does not complain.
2K does not make excuses.
2K delivers style, identity, and depth every year on a massive roster.
Meanwhile, Undisputed struggles to give a handful of boxers slightly modified movements while the rest all punch, move, defend, and react the same way.
It is not because boxing is harder.
It is because SCI built the wrong foundation.
EA Sports and MLB The Show prove it further
EA delivers:
-
Multiple throwing styles
-
Ball carrier behaviors
-
Defensive AI packages
-
Traits that affect real-time decisions
-
Adaptive logic across 11 vs 11 interactions
MLB The Show gives:
-
Hundreds of unique batting stances
-
Unique swings
-
Different pitching windups
-
Signature home run animations
-
Behavioral tendencies
If these studios can deliver thousands of individualized animations across massive team sports, SCI cannot hide behind the narrative that individual boxer styles require impossible resources.
Boxing is one athlete vs one athlete.
Eight punches. A handful of defensive maneuvers.
Basic footwork. Individual rhythm.
Far fewer interactions.
The workload is lighter, not heavier.
The real missing piece that would have revolutionized boxing games
SCI did not just fail to implement unique animations.
They failed to build a system that makes individuality matter.
A deep tendency, capabilities, and traits tree.
This system would have transformed the sport into a videogame form. It would allow boxers to behave like themselves even if they share animations. It provides individuality at the logic level, not just the visual level.
This is where sports games make their magic.
What a real tendency system provides
-
Aggression levels
-
Pressure logic
-
Counter timing
-
Ring generalship
-
Defensive habits
-
Preferred angles
-
Combo selection logic
-
Risk-taking thresholds
-
Survival instincts
-
Setup behaviors
-
Rhythm tendencies
-
Preferred distance
-
Body vs head ratio
-
Style-based reactions under fatigue
-
Behavior changes when hurt
-
Tactical decision making
Every boxer becomes a personality, not a stat sheet.
This is how you get Ali, Tyson, Chávez, Winky Wright, James Toney, Trinidad, Pacquiao, and others to feel different, even with shared animations.
SCI never built this because it requires understanding of boxing, not animation budgets.
Why the system doesn't require a big team
SCI frequently hides behind resource excuses.
A tendency and traits engine does not require:
-
A giant animation team
-
A massive staff of programmers
-
Dozens of AI engineers
-
Large motion capture sessions
This is a designer-driven system.
A realistic breakdown of a team needed to build it:
-
One AI designer to define the categories
-
One gameplay programmer to hook logic to tendencies
-
One systems designer to map traits, capabilities, and style templates
That is it.
Large AAA teams did more than this twenty years ago. Even small indie sports titles do this today.
SCI made it sound impossible because they never committed to doing it.
What this system would have changed for Undisputed
A real tendency engine would have:
Given every boxer's identity without requiring unique animations
Individuality would come from behavior, not just visuals.
Styles would emerge naturally.
No more clones.
Produced emergent AI
No more repetitive patterns or predictable routines.
Boxers would adjust, adapt, and strategize.
Transformed career mode
Every opponent would feel different.
Prospects would evolve.
Veterans would adjust.
Aging and fatigue would reshape behavior realistically.
Delivered the authenticity fans expected
Players did not buy Undisputed because they were starving for a boxing game.
They bought it because SCI originally promised individuality, realism, and simulation depth.
A deep behavioral engine was the missing key to that promise.
Why SCI avoided building it
It is not difficult.
It is not complexity.
It is not ba udget.
It is not staff size.
It is prioritization.
SCI prioritized:
-
DLC boxer revenue
-
Cosmetic updates
-
Flashy but shallow adjustments
-
Influencer pleasing features
-
Short-term patch cycling
A true tendency system would have exposed:
-
Weak AI fundamentals
-
Shallow boxing knowledge
-
Inconsistent gameplay logic
-
Conflicts between arcade tuning and realism
-
The lack of a simulation structure from day one
SCI avoided the thing that would have held them accountable.
The final takeaway
A studio that understands sports simulation knows that individuality comes from systems, not excuses.
NBA 2K sets the standard.
EA Sports sets the standard.
MLB The Show sets the standard.
If those studios can deliver signature identity to hundreds of players across complex environments, there is no excuse for 70-plus boxers sharing the same movement DNA in a game that claims to represent the sweet science.
A deep tendency, capability, and traits tree would have been the most revolutionary feature ever introduced to a boxing videogame.
It is not expensive.
It is not difficult.
It is not unrealistic.
It is the one thing that SCI chose not to build, and that single decision is the reason Undisputed will never reach the level fans expected from the day they saw the original ESBC alpha footage.
No comments:
Post a Comment